top of page

First issue: is this from personal suffering or intellectual curiosity

The problem of evil

How could a loving God allow so much suffering?

Why did God let me be hurt?

Logical vs probabilistic vs personal pain    

If God was all powerful He could prevent evil.

If God was all good He would want to prevent evil

There is evil

Therefore either:

God is not all powerful

God is not good

There is no God

Before we explain pain we need to look for it. The person you are talking to may have real and present pain in their lives. Sometimes it is easier to turn pain into anger than to get healing. Turning pain into anger turn’s vulnerability into a false sense of strength. 

There are three categories of answer to this challenge. The Second way is to take a look at the logical argument and see what is the accepted understanding among philosophers today, in other words does this argument render belief in God unreasonable. We will do that below. The Third area is a response to the statement, ‘ok sure it is possible that God exists but when we look closer at the amount of suffering in our world today it is highly improbable that God does exists. Click here for that section. But first we need to acknowledge that for many the logic is better expressed in this formula. 

I experienced PAIN!!!

If God was strong enough He could have prevented it. 

If God loved me He would have prevented it. 

If God does not care for me, then I don’t like Him either. 

Or I experienced pain because there is no God. 

In this situation the primary goal is for the person in pain to be listened to. First they need the healing of a listening ear and either a loving heart or good counselor. Part of the healing might be understanding that God sometimes has a reason for allowing suffering as a method of achieving a reward that outweighs the pain. As a loving parent, I allowed my children to feel the pain of a vaccination shot for the greater good of them being immunized from life-threatening diseases. So when someone brings ups one of these questions listen carefully for a wounded heart hiding behind the challenge.   

The logical problem of evil has been argued over the centuries with different philosophers making good arguments on both sides. Currently the reigning argument restates the logical problem this way:

  1. If God was all powerful He could prevent evil.

  2. If God was all good He would want to prevent evil

  3. There is evil

  4. Therefore either:

    • God is not all powerful,

    • God is not good, or

    • There is no God

The solution to this logical problem has been in the addition of what is called a morally sufficient reason. While those three words are technical, the logic they represent is really simple, and illustrated easily. A loving and good parent does not want their child to suffer. That parent can either choose to vaccinate their child or risk the child suffer the full form oby f the disease later in life. In terms of pain the parent is trying to prevent a greater pain (the full grown disease) later in life by causing a lesser pain (the injection by needle of the vaccine). From the young child’s perspective the parent let them be hurt, they can’t see the whole story like the parent can. This concept was best argued by the philosopher Alvin Plantinga and changes the logical argument this way:

  1. If God was all powerful He could prevent evil.

  2. If God was all good He would want to prevent evil

  3. An all powerful and all good God might have a morally sufficient reason for allowing evil in pursuit of a greater good.

  4. There is evil

  5. Therefore God is good and all powerful, allowing evil in pursuit of a greater good. 

(In the argument ‘that greater good’ being the creation of the universe that enables the highest number of humans choosing to love and serve God by our own free choice.)

Practically this means that among those with doctorates in Philosophy and logic that the problem of evil does not make belief in God unreasonable. 

For the Doctoral level philosophical article see PLANTINGA, ALVIN. “The Free Will Defense.” The Problem of Evil: Selected Readings, Second Edition, edited by MICHAEL L. PETERSON, University of Notre Dame Press, 2017, pp. 95–129. JSTOR, https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctvpj7gm2.12. Accessed 16 Aug. 2023.

Recently atheists who could not disprove the solution to the logical problem of evil provided by Alvin Plantinga above have responded by essentially saying, “Ok we admit it is possible that a good and all powerful God would allow evil. But when we look around at the sheer amount and depth of the evil it is not probably true that there is God is good and all powerful. 

Add your own content here. Click to edit.

bottom of page